Arguments against Design (General)

by BBella , Saturday, August 01, 2009, 09:06 (5405 days ago) @ dhw

BBella: I would add that no outside designer is needed if within every element (seen and unseen) that IS, lies the ability to be what it was, what it IS and what it will become.
> 
> David and Matt have registered their objections to what Matt calls a "mystical statement". I think it's just another way of describing the atheist view of the laws of Nature. And it has a nice Nietzschean ring to it! - I know you aren't saying above that I am an atheist but that what I wrote is no different than what atheists claim as the law of nature. One difference is, I do believe that all that 'IS' works in a unified way as one entity and I don't have a problem calling IT God. - My point was an added response to argue that no outside force or designer would be needed if everything has built within it the capacity to be what it IS. That's probably not a good argument against a designer as much as an argument against an outside designer or force.